That's right, don't worry. This is the last time I submit this and I probably the last thing I submit for a while.

This piece has nearly driven me crazy the past couple weeks. And also I have discovered that it is a very good way to lose weight. I know that sounds silly, but it's true. I weighed myself after I was done recording and I had lost two pounds! But a little warning to everyone...make sure you eat a big meal before trying to record. This took me a couple hours of recording take after take, and at one point I thought I was going to faint because I felt weird; like sort of lightheaded and I saw stars floating all around above the piano.

Anyway, I tried to get my speed up, but this is fast as I ever want to play this piece. I do not subscribe to the notion that you have to play so terribly fast and then it's okay if your runs are a little unclear and sloppy. Or you claim you intentionally applied the pedal in such a way that makes the runs unclear. I don't buy that. Maybe my runs are a little notey and may sound like an exercise/etude, but you know what? I like them that way! I like clear runs. I think I always have, but was never brave enough to say so. Yes, I LIKE CLEAR PLAYING!! (there...had to get that off my chest...)

Before listening, let me say a thing or two: I agree that clear playing is more important than playing at breakneck speed. Often speed is a wonderful way to hide errors and imprecisions. Just Follow any of the better acrobats of the piano and pick up the dropped notes as they fall. A basoonist firend of mine once had to accompany a known pianist (I was not told who and with orchestra, of course) playing one of Rachmaninoff's concerti. He says it was the slowest version he had ever heard but also the loveliest and the he had never realised what gems were hidden in the concerto, because at top speeds they just could not be heard. After the concert they spoke and the pianist said "of course few people dare to play slowly, but how many will dare?"

Now I shall listen to your attempt.

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

Monica, I think you did a good job here. Apart from the opening section where the RH runs have sometimes unnecessary accents and some unevenness (which aren't heard at the repeat any more), I enjoyed your listening. I espeacially liked the amazing dynamic control at the section B.

_________________Hye-Jin Lee"The love for music. The respect for the composer. The desire to express something that reaches and moves the listener." (Montserrat Caballé about her main motivation for becoming a singer)

This is a good version. To me it seems a comfortable speed and I surely would not enjoy it any faster. Do I detect a slight spedding up starting from bar 271? I would have mantained the same tempo till the end. You also make a ritardando on bars 50 and 51 whereas I would have not taken that liberty.

Overall I enjoyed it.

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

"A rose by any other name ..." I for one consider it an etude. Just throw away the title and look at the music. Exactly how is it not an etude?

Exactly!

hanysz wrote:

Some of my favourite pieces are called "Etude". There's no reason why clear playing and good musicianship can't go together.

Exactly!

hyenal wrote:

Monica, I think you did a good job here. Apart from the opening section where the RH runs have sometimes unnecessary accents and some unevenness (which aren't heard at the repeat any more), I enjoyed your listening. I espeacially liked the amazing dynamic control at the section B.

Hye-Jin, you listened to all three of my attempts and always had a suggestion. Thank you for all that!

richard66 wrote:

This is a good version. To me it seems a comfortable speed and I surely would not enjoy it any faster. Do I detect a slight spedding up starting from bar 271? I would have mantained the same tempo till the end. You also make a ritardando on bars 50 and 51 whereas I would have not taken that liberty.

Overall I enjoyed it.

Thank you, Richard. My little rit. is not written in, but is intentional on my part.

Bars are not marked in my score, but if you are talking about that you detect some speeding up at the 17th bar from the end, then I am very glad because it's marked accelerando from that point all the way to the end.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Accelerando? Which edition do you have? I have two, one an urtext, and neither has any such marking and I am not sure I have ever heard it played that way.

'Well that is mighty strange, because EVERY recording I have heard has the accelerando in it. Also, EVERY score I have seen 'shows; it, including the two on IMSLP. And really, you just have to have it there! It would not end as great as it does, otherwise.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

There are many good things in this performance. The middle section (or the contrasting section) has at times some real bite to it. It is effective. I think you can do more of that interpretive approach and use that sort of passionate tone more consistently throughout the B section..

As far as the runs go, there are times when the musicality of the piece truly comes through in the line. I feel that you can bring out the musicality more by relaxing your wrists, hands and worrying less about the fingers. Being relaxed will aid you in your quest to bring out the beautiful melody to your potential.

You can do it Monica. I know you can relax more when you play. Think of weightless thumbs and wrists.

Hi Monica, this is so significantly improved from your previous posting! I didn't save the previous one but only listened to it as a direct download from the server so I can't do a full comparison. However I do think that the runs are much improved. I don't know quite what you've done, whether it be with the pedal or using a more legato approach, but the individual notes now sound much more connected and it makes more musical sense. There are a few rare moments where the triplet articulation isn't absolutely spot on, but I had to listen pretty attentively to catch them. The best part of all is the middle section where there is much more contrast and interplay between loud and soft - I think you have got this spot on. Well done on a thoroughly musical rendition.

I've never played 90/2, only No. 1. I didn't catch your original recording, but listened to this effort just now and thought it was a very good rendition indeed. I agree with your point on clear runs. I'm a firm believer that clarity is paramount in articulation, voicing, pedaling and all other elements of artistic playing. Your playing of this impromptu was very fluent and expressive. Everything you brought to the piece enhanced musicality. Great work, Monica!

P.S. And I'm glad you didn't fall off the bench!

_________________"Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities." David April

@Kaila - You are right on about relaxing the wrists and thumbs. Sometimes before I start off playing something like this, I tell myself to forget about everything and just play like there is no one listening. When I actually pay attention to that, I play much more smoothly. Trouble is I don't stay in that relaxed state for long. Thank you for the encouragement, though. I really appreciate it!

@Andrew - Thank you also for your continued interest and help in how I can improve my playing . I'm not totally sure of what I did that made this version sound so much better than the previous two, except I just practiced more. Actually, I think I have the piece memorized without meaning to...

@David - Thank you for the nice remarks. As far as falling off the bench - it was close for a minute or two. That would have made a really funny video!

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Perfect, Monica! I have to concede defeat here: I have found the indication on my scores too, but marked earlier than I the point where I noticed your speeding up. I must say I learnt this piece while I was studying and at not time did the teacher say anything about this indication. Come to think of her, she usually considered such effects in bad taste. (no half-baked pianist but a graduate of the Paris Conservatory) Anyway, I listened to all recordings on this site and none of them is consisitent: some do not accelerate, others do so only on the last two bars.

But then you see, I am one whose natural tendency is to accelerate and it is at times a struggle to keep time, so I suppose my ICC (Internal Censorship Centre ) chooses not to see such markings if it can.get away with it.

Excuse me again. As a penace I will play this piece three times in a row.

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

Oh darn, I didn't know that 'sigh' was there! Actually, it's really just me letting out my breath because I probably held it the whole time I was playing. I need to have 'breathe' marked in my score in a couple places, since I do the dumb thing of 'not' breathing when I am nervous and playing something fast. Good thing I got the piece down in around five minutes; it's not easy to hold one's breath that long..... Thank you for listening, Didier.

Richard, okay you go play this piece five times in a row, but don't forget to hold your breath the whole time. Oh, and also you have to pat your head and rub your tummy at the same time too!

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Monica, I hope you'll excuse my late arrival to the party. I offer some of my thoughts in our "virtual masterclass" here on PS (some of which may be controversial). As far as the etude nature of the piece I offer that it bears remarkable kinship in spirit to Czerny Op.740 (The Art of Finger Dexterity) No.17, possibly Op.299 (School of Velocity) No.26, but mostly (for me) the Moszkowski Op.72 (15 Etudes of Virtuosity) No. 6 in F major. IMO, the piece is best approached as an artistic etude. In fact, if I were sitting on an Oral Board of Examination for an advanced candidate in Piano Performance and Literature, and admittedly wanted to stew the candidate, I would ask if Schubert composed any Etudes. And when the candidate answered "No," I would follow with "What about the second Impromptu of Op.90?" The point being, not to be so limited that we forget to see the music at the cost of the title (as I said before, "A rose by anyother name is but a rose"). This fist step may be the most important and controversial, Do I approach the work by the nature of its title or its betrayed purpose? I think it makes a very big difference. I think it should be approached as if it were an Etude of your favorite etude composer (Cherny, Cramer, Clementi, Chopin, Henselt, Liszt, Moszkowski, Moscheles, Haberbier, etc.)

First, so that we're on the same page of music, the first note is in measure zero (0). As such the Ben Marcato ("B" music) begins at m.83, the return of the "A" material at m.169, and the "Coda" at m.251 (but this is false, as it is the "B" music; the real Coda, is not a Coda at all but a Codetta that is from m.276 to the end). That completes the overview.

I think the entire "A" section should be played without pedal, as the very nature of the thematic material is scalar and creeping chromaticism. This first section should have "sweeping" motion of dynamics that rise and fall and climb even as a roller-coaster does. With so many fast notes in the right hand, the notes themselves become less important and the work of the pianist is to shape the groups and phrases. The absolutely worse thing anyone can do with this work is to "turn the right hand on" and let it play like a machine gun. This balerina needs "sparkling delicacy" that is "supported" by the male dancer of the LH. For the section at m.26-, please voice the RH half notes fully, recalling with them the second-beat half notes of the LH material (if you don't think of it as such, you won't play it as such). Sometimes here the right hand is "required" to do some thumb/hand passing, or is it so? Have you thought that on occasion (m26, 28, 30, 32, etc.) you may play the down-beat first note of the RH with the LH? This way you don't have to do the crossing with the RH. Having come this far and noting the importance that Schubert gives to the 2nd beat, is it possible that it changes the way that we play the LH at the beginning? I think it does. For me, I see now (in analytical retrospect) that the sounding of the second beat is as significantly characteristic to the work as any other feature. Think about it. To wrap up the first departure and its return, I would make a big deal about voicing the Cb in the LH in measure 49 so as to carry it through to an audible resolution on the Bb in m.51.

Reagarding the Ben Marcato in m. 83, the most important thing I can say, is that Schubert failed supremely in the manner that he wrote his enharmonic modulation, and if you play it his way, you are starting off on the wrong foot. This is what I mean, the Gg major chord that serves as dominant to B minor is a huge sublimation! I would "change" the Gb major chord of m.82, to an F# major chord! Don't laugh, it makes all the difference in the world. Think about it. In this section I would use some judicious pedaling, but never allowing scalar melody to co-mingle the notes (meaning if you use pedal in m.85, you will need to change it on each beat) . The phrases here are four measures long and should be articulated with a break in between (just because he doesn't "compose" the [breaths with] rests doesn't mean there aren't any. I know you know what I mean.) At m.105 the RH should begin with fingers 2/5, no pedaling, always maintaining the prominent E# resolving to F# (which should be shortened so as to take a breath as the last note of the four bar group). (Last sentance is of course the same for m.149, etc.)

At the improperly labeled "Coda" (now clearly seen as just "B" material, making the auditor think it is a rondo or repeated binary form), again enter with an F# chord not a Gb chord . Here I will comment directly to your interpretation and say that just because the second four-bar group (m.255-258) is in eb minor, it in no way means you should draw back on the force of the statement. You do the prior phrase with nice attitude, but then retreat when it shifts to the closing key. I would not do that; I would maintain a strong character throughout. The only dynamic from here to the end is FF with several fz thrown in for good measure! My score (the Breitkopf & Hartel reprint by Dover) shows the accelerando beginning m267. Harmonically, he writes a hemiola for bars 280-281 (i.e. meter change to 2/4). Don't be afraid to play it that way: 1,2,3,1,2,3,1. You have a slight hesitation on the penultimate chord that spoils it for me (can you close the gap with editing?)

There you have it. Admittedly more about the work than your performance, but I think it is important. The big take away that I would tell you is, "Play it like a great etude and damn the torpedos!" Don't use any pedal if possible and think about the interpretive and "applied techinique" issues I listed above. Personally, I think you have the piece ready now to simmer, and when you return to it, you may have a masterful performance.

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Last edited by musical-md on Sun Jan 30, 2011 3:29 am, edited 3 times in total.

Wow, thank you, Eddy. You have surprised me! "Better late than never" is a something I believe in.

Here is my response:

I agree about bringing out the RH half notes at m.26. I did this better in another recording attempt but then thought someone may think I played them too loud. I should have stuck with my instincts there. Regarding using my LH for the 1st note in the RH: That's a very interesting idea and I went right to my piano and tried it, but alas I cannot reach the notes. I'd have to jump the 1st LH note to the 1st RH note and although it can be done very quickly, there is still a slight 'bump' and I'm not sure that would be acceptable.

Hit the C-flat more in m. 49 - that's good, I'll make note of that.

Ok, now about changing the chord at m.82 from a G-flat chord to an F-sharp chord. I can sort of understand where you are going with this, as it leads right to the key change at m. 83. But I'm not sure the ear could hear this difference. Unless you mean that one should sort of push forward on that chord? Except it's marked ffz and I thought I came down pretty hard on the chord...I guess I don't really understand what you mean. Plus, there is a rest on beat 3.

Regarding the phrasing in the opening lines of the B-section. I felt the length of the phrases to be 8 measures, not 4. Am I wrong? Are you right? Or is it subjective? I really do not know, since I've not studied this piece with a teacher.

M. 105 - yes, my fingering is marked 2 and 5 but I changed it to 1 and 5. I also mistakenly let go of the E-sharp too, but thought no one would notice.

Coda : My score at ms. 255-258 are marked mf, so that's why I backed off there and also at ms. 263-266. Did Schubert write in these dynamics? Interesting idea about playing those staccato chords at ms. 280-281 like how you describe. I'll try that. As to the hesitation - it's only just me trying to get my hands onto the next set of notes. I guess I could close it up with editing, but I would not feel right it. Is it really that bad?

Finally, when I came back to seriously practicing piano about 11 years ago (after not practicing for nearly 16 years), I felt that EVERYTHING I played was an etude, because each piece had some sort of technicality to work out or I needed to drill on the scale/arpeggio passages. So I think it's interesting that you some others here feel so strongly that this 'Impromptu' is really an 'Etude'.

Well, thanks again, Eddy, for the thorough and careful critique. You can now ask me to change your bio page again if you wish.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Regarding the magic I'm talking about at the enharmonic modulation (see my prior post), it is about attitude that sneaks its way into performance. This is very psychological and could never be proven "scientifically" but we're talking about art here. How real is it? For me it is VERY real! How real would it be to an auditor? That would be an interesting test. An educated audience is asked to listen to this work performed by ten pianists (half of which in their mind play an F# chord instead of the Gb. Would the auditors (who know that some will play F# major and the others the enharmonic) be able to tell a difference in the approach? I must admit, probably not. But that doesn't change my mind that when I play the first two notes of the Beethoven Op.57 (C-Ab) I do so in my head over a "silent" Dominant 7th chord, not the tonic chord! The difference is that I feel like I'm playing it lifting off the seat with infused energy, rather than sinking back into a comfortable chair. For me, the enharmonic modulation to the "B" section of this Impromptu, requies a REAL dominant to propel the music into it, not some sappy Gb major chord to sneak into it sideways. Having said all this, it may only affect those who are in a masterclass audience and getting their idea changed too, but I will continue to "live in my own little world."

The difference is editions (taken as legitimate) only raises the notion that we can take more liberties than we think we can in interpreting the work.

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

There's a lot of good points in what you say. I just disagree with one detail:

musical-md wrote:

I think the entire "A" section should be played without pedal, as the very nature of the thematic material is scalar and creeping chromaticism.

This is a rather "hardcore" attitude! Would you play Chopin's opus 25 no. 11 without pedal too? Certainly you need to be a little discreet with the pedal in the Schubert. It's important to have enough clarity, and it would be a good idea to practice the piece entirely without pedal. But in performance, I wouldn't want it to sound too dry.

There's a lot of good points in what you say. I just disagree with one detail:

musical-md wrote:

I think the entire "A" section should be played without pedal, as the very nature of the thematic material is scalar and creeping chromaticism.

This is a rather "hardcore" attitude! Would you play Chopin's opus 25 no. 11 without pedal too? Certainly you need to be a little discreet with the pedal in the Schubert. It's important to have enough clarity, and it would be a good idea to practice the piece entirely without pedal. But in performance, I wouldn't want it to sound too dry.

Alexander, Just one point of disagreement?! I'm elated! To answer your question, no; that is, I would use pedal as I do also on the cascades of the trio section of the Chopin 3rd Scherzo. (But the RH of the Chopin you mention is not foremost, it is background to the LH chords.) I think a fine execution of the Schubert is possible without use of the damper pedal in the "A" section, but can also be accomplished with judicious use. I agree that it is best practiced without pedal, but legato not secco.

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Personally, I like the Schubert with judicious and careful pedal to assure clarity in light of the continuous neighboring and passing tones in the passage work. Otherwise, I feel it would sound altogether dry. To make a parallel point, back in the early 1990s (Chris calls these my "historic recordings" ), I recorded Chopin's Etude, Op. 10, No. 6 in E flat minor nearly entirely without pedal, as I believed that doing so was actually the whole point of the etude--playing a lyrical etude with legato touch with the fingers alone. I had too often heard other pianists cast an impressionistic-like haze over it that seemed more like a pall. But... if I were to relearn that etude today, I believe I would play it with pedal, albeit a very controlled pedal. It would be the same if I were to undertake this Schubert impromptu. Just my 2 cents.

David

_________________"Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities." David April

I agree about the pedaling too and think it should be used, but like we all know - you have to be very careful or else you end up with a blur. But talk about applying the concept of etude to this piece; then not only is practicing playing 'finger legato' one of our goals, but also the goal of practicing the pedaling so that it's just right. It's a double-whammy! (for me, anyway) Boy, I think EVERYBODY should practice this piece and then record it so that you can listen back and see if you played things correctly. I really learned a lot from doing so (thanks to all of you! ) from the talk about clear runs, legato, pedaling, getting the triplets/rhythm right, and the list goes on. Most of you do not know this, but a few years ago we had someone submit this piece (and a couple other pieces) but it turned out to be a fake. He/she was not the player - the piece came off a demo-track from a digital piano. We booted him/her right off the site. Anyway, that's when I first heard the piece, liked it right away and knew I wanted to play it too some day.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

Hi Monica,first, let me say, I love clear playing (at least in 99% or so of all cases). And also concerning this piece, it´s the usual way to play the runs clearly, more or less without pedal respective some attentive foot kicks. That doesn´t mean, that an exception can be also convincing. (You know, artistic thinking can´t be hundred percent fix respective "stiff".)In your version you use more pedal than I do in my newest version, btw.And generally this piece cannot be considered as a real etude, I think that´s evident, at the best as an "etude" with musical respective artistic value like f.ex. the etudes by Chopin.In summary you did a quite nice verison here, of course! I have the following positive remarks and suggestions of improvement:The crescendos and decrescendos in bar 3-4 respective 11-12 and parallel places could be more audible (I hardly could notice them).I don´t understand the accent on beat two in bar 38 in the bass-voice.The ff is too weak (bar 68 ff.). Especially in Schuberts music the extreme dynamical contrasts are essential. They are expression of his inner disruption and his suffering, which was immense. They mirror the contrast between suffering respective resignation and sudden respective quasi eruptive attempts to fight against his destiny. Especially the coda is such a moment and should be played as fortissimo as possible (you play it much too softly and elegantly).The cresc.-decresc. in bar 85, 89 and parallel places are missing.I like your ideas of staccato at some places (which is not in the Henle-Urtext-score, btw), but it´s a nice change for the year and underlines the dancing rhythm of the 3/4-bar, like f.ex. in bar 101, 145, bar 154-162 (here I really love that, though its not in the score!)On the other side you don´t play staccato on many places, there is a staccato-point in the score like f.ex. in bar 123, 124. (I also take some few freedoms concerning the staccato, btw).The tempo of the reprise (A-section) still is too slow compared with your tempo before.

It´s a pity in my humble opinion, that you say, it´s the last time you have recorded that piece, Monica. I think, we are in a piano forum here, which sense it is to give us praises and suggestions of improvements, so that we always feel encouraged to work further on the pieces and to bring them up to a certain perfection.

Thanks, Andreas. Good that you liked my staccatos. Feel free to use my way in your own playing. Regarding the 'etude' issue - sorry, but I agree with the others that this piece is an etude. But really I've grown bored talking about it, and anyway I have already moved on to learning some new pieces.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

The ff is too weak (bar 68 ff.). Especially in Schuberts music the extreme dynamical contrasts are essential. They are expression of his inner disruption and his suffering, which was immense. They mirror the contrast between suffering respective resignation and sudden respective quasi eruptive attempts to fight against his destiny. Especially the coda is such a moment and should be played as fortissimo as possible (you play it much too softly and elegantly).

I agree with your point but in this music I would not recommend 'as fortissimo as possible' on a modern grand. On a period instrument you'd probably need to do that to make the desired impact but on a bright powerful Yamaha I think it would be out of place. This was a discussion I had with my teacher about the many places where Grieg wrote ff or even fff, which on a modern grand we should treat more as f and ff respectively.

What did I see the other day, that in some countries it is forbidden by law to play fff in concerts?

I am not sure I would care to go deaf just because Schubert wrote ff when ff in modern notation would be f. Anyway, has anyone defined what ff is? I am yet to see indications such as fff = 100Bb on a score. Then of course, it depends how big the room is, if it is full or empty. In the warehouse where I last tried out a piano p became ff.

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

This is an interesting turn of the thread: interpretatin of dynamic indications across centuries. I have found it to be far more interesting to consider the difference in the psychological perception of speed (tempo) across the centuries. Consider that for most of human history the fastest velocity a human could experience was on horseback. Then, the "mind-blowing" train! Consider what it takes to now make a 21st century human (in industrialized modern contries) to think a thing is fast. We speak or bullet-trains and mega Hertz and giga Hertz tera Hertz frequencies, and we know the speed of light, and of escape velocity and "plain-old" supersonic flight. And then there is the rapidity that our minds have grown accustomed to with images on TV and movies, etc. Then a musician sees a score that says "Presto," like in the C minor prelude of Bach's WTK Bk.1, and what do we do? We bring our "warp-speed" 21st century mentality to a work of a time when horseback was the fastest human experience. Food for thought?

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Indeed, Eddy, indeed. Maybe this is why I feel so at unease leastening to pieces I know that I simply cannot follow because of speed and all the lovely harmonies that get lost when one goes over them so fast that wrong notes could be played in their place and no one notices.

The analogy with dynamics is the same. Would Schubert ever have considered that ff is so loud his ears would buzz afterwards? Could he even consider such a level of noise to be possible or even desirable?

And then consider an ff that is not actually loud, but intense. An ff that is not really much louder than mf but is somehow stronger. I remember when I took lessons this is what the teacher spoke about. She also used to say that before any crescendo you need to decrease volume, so that you seem to grow much louder than you actually do. Like this:

mp < ff

played

mp - p < f

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

All that comparisons between historical instruments and pianos of today concerning the loudness respective dynamic range is nice and well, but all these prescriptions like ff and fff etc. are relative, so for me it´s just a matter of feeling and taste, of course. In every case from my view Monica plays the Coda much too silent, even for a modern grand-piano...

And really, it generally is musically incompetent to consider this Impromptu as an "etude" (in the sense of a finger excercise), because it definitively is an Impromptu and no etude, so it can´t be meant by Schubert as such. (That´s very simple, isn´t it?!)

... And really, it generally is musically incompetent to consider this Impromptu as an "etude" (in the sense of a finger excercise), because it definitively is an Impromptu and no etude, so it can´t be meant by Schubert as such. (That´s very simple, isn´t it?!)

Andreas, I couldn't disagree more! First let me make clear that I never said it was "an exercise," rather "an Etude". An exercise is not a study, it is simply an exercise. Also, since it was my admittedly controversial idea to begin with, I will say that under no uncertain terms am I musically incompetent - I have had too much professional training to allow for that. I won't even begin to justify that scale work is found in Uber-abundance in etudes (of both kinds: the less artistic (Kohler, Czerny, etc.) and the more artistic (Chopin, Henselt, Liszt, etc.)). So I will address other items:

1. the climbing triplet figure of bars 3-4: Well, if anyone had first studied exercises nos. 3 and 4 of the 3rd section (Exercises based upon the Chromatic Scale) of "The Complete School of Technique for the Piano" by Isidor Philipp, they already would have mastered these type passages.2. A similar study to that indicated above is found in Pischna's 60 Technical Studies at exercise no 18.3. The Impromptu bears great resemblence to Moscheles Op. 70 (24 Studies for the Piano) No.1 4. The Impromptu bears great resemblence to Moszkowski, Op.72 (15 Etudes de Virtuosite) No.65. MacDowell's Twelve Virtuoso Studies Op.46, has etude no. 11 titled "Impromptu" and has frequent RH work that is not too dissimilar from the Schubert.6. While we're at it, look at the enormous similarity of the 3rd Impromptu with Czerny Op.299, No. 27!

I wonder if your opinion of "Etude" is a very lowly form that struggles to be musically respectable. I don't share that view. I assure you that I am not on a crusade to "retitle" the 2nd Impromptu as an etude, however, I very much did intend to bring to the discussion a justified view that I believe has bearing on the performance of the work. In fact, this is precisely the sort of thing that one might hear at a masterclass.Respectfully,Eddy

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

I just started working on the entire Op.90 set--what a gorgeous music (of course, as most of Schubert) and such a pleasure to play!

I listen to your recording and enjoyed it. If I may take a liberty to give you a couple of little suggestions. First, I'd lighten up the beginning even more and instead of "working with fingers" treat it more as "caressing". I'd also paid very special attention to harmonic fillings in LH (B flat on the second bit, followed by the chords). Very often they stick out, covering interaction of the melodic line of the bass (pay more attention to that one, instead), and "creek flow" in the RH. I think such a simple thing will give you much more control, as subconsciously it won't take your attention (and mine, as a listener) to it.

And really, it generally is musically incompetent to consider this Impromptu as an "etude" (in the sense of a finger excercise), because it definitively is an Impromptu and no etude, so it can´t be meant by Schubert as such. (That´s very simple, isn´t it?!)

If we're going to keep flogging this dead horse, then let me point out that in the other thread Andreas said:

musicusblau wrote:

But let me say, I see a little difference of expression comparing a Chopin-etude with a Czerny-etude f.ex.

(the 13th post in the thread; I'm not sure how to make a link to a specific post).

I agree with this comment. And I think it reinforces the point that others are trying to make: that it's no good trying to be dogmatic about what this word "etude" means.

STOP THE PRESSES! STOP THE PRESSES! Ooo, I think I found some very interesting goodies on the Impromptu No. 2 "etude" issue.

From John Gillespie's Five Centuries of Keyboard Music, c. 1965 by Wadsworth Publishing (available as a Dover Reprint), page 204, "Impromptu Op.90, No.2, in E-Flat Major is like a study piece." [emphasis added] But much better than that is what follows.

From Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 3rd edition (the only one I have in my house), s.v. Impromptu: "... two sets of pieces by Schubert known as impromptus -- op.90, Nos. 1 to 4, and op.142 Nos. 1 to 4, mostly variations -- were, the first certainly and the second propbably, not so titled by him. The autograph of the first exists. It has no date, and no title to either of the pieces, the word 'Impromptu' having been added by the publishers, the Haslingers, one of whom also took upon himself to change the key of the third piece from Gb to G...." [emphasis added] Fascinating! I wonder if any on PS have a subscription to the on-line Grove's, or perhaps another more recent edition in their home?

_________________Eddy M. del Rio, MD"A smattering will not do. They must know all the keys, major and minor, and they must literally 'know them backwards.'" - Josef Lhevinne

Last edited by musical-md on Tue Mar 08, 2011 7:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

This is an interesting turn of the thread: interpretatin of dynamic indications across centuries. I have found it to be far more interesting to consider the difference in the psychological perception of speed (tempo) across the centuries.

That's interesting, Eddy. I have known and understood the idea about earlier pianos not being capable of playing as loud as present-day pianos, but I never thought about how our perception of playing fast has changed over time. I think I will use that next time I submit something that is supposed to be fast, but I am unable to play it super-fast. I'll just say "but I'm playing it as fast as people played it back in the day," or something like that. Will you let me get away with that excuse?

@Marik: Hello Marik,Thank you for listening and for the suggestions. As I practiced this piece, there were times when I was relaxed and not nervous about anything, and then I could play the opening section more 'caressingly'. My problem is that I get nervous when I'm recording - even easy pieces, and then I am usually tense. Regarding the B section - I understand what you're saying about bringing out the melodic line in the LH more. I have this thing for low bass notes - I love them! But I am sorry, I don't understand what "creek flow" is.

@Eddy - very interesting again about the etude thing! I think I have access to Grove's online through my son's school. I'll look into it tomorrow - I dead tired right now. Regarding the 'etude' issue: I can only say that for me, practicing all the triplets was 'good work'. Meaning, it's something I had not encountered in other pieces I had worked on recently, and so I think it will help me to not only get this piece better when I practice it again, but it surely will help when I come to another piece with a thousand triplets. To me, that makes op. 90/2 an 'etude'.

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

I think I will use that next time I submit something that is supposed to be fast, but I am unable to play it super-fast. I'll just say "but I'm playing it as fast as people played it back in the day," or something like that. Will you let me get away with that excuse?

In fact, in many cases I think people used to play faster but on modern pianos, with a heavier action and a richer tone quality, we ought to go slower. So yes, it's a good excuse!

True, Eddy, Tobias Haslinger, their first publisher, not only changed op 90/3 from Gb to G but from CC to C (time signatures) ! I remember actually seeing a reprint of this edition. I have a comment to that efect in my edition, published by the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music. It also mentions the first edition was undated, unsigned and untitled. There are manuscript copies, one of No 1 and one of Nos 3 and 4 that call them Improptus, but No 2 is left in the cold.

And they started life as op 87, not 90.

My edition also calls attention to the extreme vagueness of Schubert's notation of accidentals and dynamics.

In the end we are not playing Schubert: we are endlessly repeating an accepted interpretation of Schubert. Will you dare to deviate and be accused of not respecting what people believe were Schubert's wishes?

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

@Marik: Hello Marik,Thank you for listening and for the suggestions. As I practiced this piece, there were times when I was relaxed and not nervous about anything, and then I could play the opening section more 'caressingly'. My problem is that I get nervous when I'm recording - even easy pieces, and then I am usually tense.

Yeah, tell me that... My heart sinks and hands get cold when I see microphones and have to play. That's why I never record at home--only live... when there is no choice .

Quote:

Regarding the B section - I understand what you're saying about bringing out the melodic line in the LH more. I have this thing for low bass notes - I love them! But I am sorry, I don't understand what "creek flow" is.

Sorry, I was not clear enough. I meant B-flat played with thumb in LH in the beginning. It is just a harmonic filling, but often sticks out and gets on the way of the melody. By the "creek flow" I mean RH filigree.

Yeah, tell me that... My heart sinks and hands get cold when I see microphones and have to play. That's why I never record at home--only live... when there is no choice .

I am even worse in live settings. Really, I should just go and live on a deserted island. Nobody else there - just me and a piano (and some good wine, of course... )

Marik wrote:

Sorry, I was not clear enough. I meant B-flat played with thumb in LH in the beginning. It is just a harmonic filling, but often sticks out and gets on the way of the melody. By the "creek flow" I mean RH filigree.

You know what's funny? I am using sheet music that was printed in 1897. I didn't buy it (I'm not thaaaat old ), but I somehow just had it in a closet. I never studied the piece with any of my former teachers, either. What's funny is that someone marked lightly with a pencil "soft thumb" right on that very spot that you are talking about - the B-flat in the LH at the beginning. So okay, between you and the other mystery person, I have gotten the message.

@Eddy - I do have access to Grove and Oxford online, but have not found anything more that what you already stated. I did find a Doctorate thesis from someone online who wrote on Schubert's "Impromptus". Besides also telling about how the Op. 90 (specifically no. 1 and 2) were not titled by Schubert, the author states this:

***********************However, it often comes as a big surprise to those who attempt to play Schubert’s piano pieces that his idiomatic keyboard patterns do not seem to fit the hands comfortably. Repeated chordal passages are often accompanied with difficult skips and thickness of texture; one needs to be cautious not to distract from the melodic line. Sudden shifts in register create orchestral effects but also cause technical difficulties. Scalar passages are sometimes scrambled by added chromatic passing tones, which result in awkward fingerings. Because of these difficulties, successful performance of Schubert’s pieces requires an unusual amount of patience and practice in polishing details, and, the music sounds satisfying only after an extremely high level of refinement is done.

Schubert’s two sets of four impromptus D. 899 and D. 935 are among the keyboard pieces to demonstrate his keyboard writing style, which is in part a product on the piano of the period. Understanding Schubertian keyboard idioms enables the pianist to learn how to cope with their difficulties and can lead to more successful performances.

*******************

Doesn't that last sentence remind one of the definition of an etude? Also, the last sentence of the first paragraph - ok, that's directed right at me, I know it!

_________________"Simplicity is the highest goal, achievable when you have overcome all difficulties." ~ Frederic Chopin

I have been practising this lately and, even before I read this, I noticed... the Bb stricking out! To avoid this (when possible, which it is not in this piece) I use other fingers than the thumb when a note should not be emphasised.

_________________Richard Willmer"Please do not shoot the pianistHe is doing his best."Oscar Wilde: Impressions of America: Leadville

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum